C.A.R. shotgun shooting technique

For quite someone I have been researching tactical use of a 20" shotgun in CQB as preparation for HD situations. I came across the late Paul Castle's Center Axis Relock (C.A.R.) technique and thought I would try it at the range and it worked flawlessly. I stood just like the photo below.



I like this system because it allows you to keep your long gun close to your body and aim accurately without sights. You essentially use your head and the barrel as your sights.

I put slugs and 00 buck in the torso of the target at 7yds and 10yds, which would be typical in home engagement distances. Below are pics of my results. My chest and the barrel lines up with the center of the target.



Above was at 7 yards using 2 3/4" Federal Tru ball slugs. As you can see the shots are fairly accurate.



Above was at 7 yards using 2 3/4" Winchester SuperX 00 buck. The pellets put all 3 shots were within the torso of the target.

I wanted to see how accurate the technique was at 10 yards using Hornady 2 3/4" TAP 00 with Versatite wads. As you can see the technique put all three shots on target.



Overall I find this stance quite effective.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

Might have to try that out. Very similar to what I learned in the USMC. Difference being the gun was held in normal upright position and stock pinched between upper arm and body, not high elbow as in the pic.

The technique your describing sounds like that taught by Gabriel Suarez or Massad Ayoob. You can see various positions at this link http://pistol-grip-only-shotgun-techniq ... nique.html

I think with body armor a less bladed stance may be better to minimize the chance of getting hit where there is no armor. Otherwise the bladed stance follows the martial arts principals of minimizing the profile to be hit.

Also with the blades stance your arms swing with the recoil so there is little recoil felt.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

It's been a lot of years, but High Tuck seems to ring a bell. Used it with the old Win Model 12 trench gun.

WolfPak said:

Otherwise the bladed stance follows the martial arts principals of minimizing the profile to be hit.

Also with the blades stance your arms swing with the recoil so there is little recoil felt.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

Click to expand...

When I took my CQB pistol course, the instructor was adamant about never using the blade stance. Yes, you minimize your target, but it is more lethal to yourself if you DO take a hit. The way he explained it was, when you are standing perpendicular to the target, the likely hood of you taking a bullet in one organ and living was higher (80% of people shot with a pistol live, your body can naturally seal a hole less than .40 inches). If you blade, and take a hit, the likely hood of you getting hit in multiple organs, and dying was higher (stacking organs). He told us, you can live with one lung standing perpendicular; it’s hard to live with no lungs if the bullet passes through standing in the blade stance.

He also taught us knife fighting;
Rule 1: Don't get in a knife fight.
Rule 2: Don't get in a knife fight.
Rule 3: If you get in a knife fight, you are going to get cut, and have to go to the hospital. If you’re lucky it is only stiches.

Frank

I agree with your points and that its why I opened up my bladed stance to optimize four factors: 1) minimize my body as a target, 2) minimize the path of the bullet should I get hit, 3) maximize the accuracy of non-sighted aiming (this occurs because the gun is held closer to your body so it naturally follows what you are looking at) and 4) allow my arms the freedom to absorb the recoil.

As far as a knife fight, yes avoid it at all costs. Otherwise anticipate getting cut and try to minimize strikes to non-vital areas such as the outer forearms where there are no major arteries or veins.

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

In my first post I showed Paul Castle's stance. I stood like that but with a more open stance. It is a trade off of minimizing yourself as a target so that you don't get hit and the damage that could occur should you get hit. I think of you are moving and not stationary the semi-bladed stance with its minimal profile would be more advantageous; of course I am hoping never to have to test these out.




Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2